279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises

298 ITR 141High Court2008#74 most cited

What is 279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises authority for?

Employee contributions to provident fund or ESI, even if deposited after the due date specified in the respective welfare statutes, are allowable as a deduction under Section 36(1)(va) if paid before the due date for filing the income-tax return. This judgment aligns the treatment of employee contributions with employer contributions under Section 43B.

706

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 382,409 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Sabari Enterprises · 298 ITR 141 · Karnataka High Court · Section 36(1)(va) · Section 43B · employee contribution · provident fund · ESI · payment before return filing · disallowance · due date for deposit · employer contribution · Alom Extrusions

Sections most often in play

Section 36(1)(va)Section 43BSection 143(1)Section 2(24)(x)Section 143(1)(a)Section 37(1)Section 143(3)Section 234B

Issues it is cited on

section 43(b)section 36(va)undisclosed foreign income and assetssection 43b(b)section 34(1)(iv)section 3(b)section 149(1)(c)section 4(2)actual payment basissection 34(1)section 201(3)section 36(1)(iv)

Judgments citing 279 ITR 331/149 Taxman 15 (Guj.); 5. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises

Aspiration Advertising Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Processing Centre, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 341/BANG/2021[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Oct 2021AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevanand Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Shilpa N. C, Additional CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 43B

…u/s.139(1) of the Act and hence has been considered allowable on the basis of decision of Supreme Court in CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC) and other cases such as CIT Vs Magus Customers Dialog (P) Ltd (Kar), CIT Vs Sabri Enterprises (2008) 298 ITR 141 (Kar), Consultants India P Ltd Vs CIT Bangalore III (2013) 597/34 Taxman.com 20 (Kar). With regard to inconsistency in total disallowance u/s 37, the sum of Rs.17,193/- incurred as Club Expenses is for the purposes of Customers and the same is allowable on the basis of decision of Supreme Court in United Glass Manufacturing Company. 4. However t…

Aspiration Advertising Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Processing Centre, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 340/BANG/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Oct 2021AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevanand Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Smt. Shilpa N. C, Additional CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 43B

…u/s.139(1) of the Act and hence has been considered allowable on the basis of decision of Supreme Court in CIT vs. Alom Extrusions Ltd (2009) 319 ITR 306 (SC) and other cases such as CIT Vs Magus Customers Dialog (P) Ltd (Kar), CIT Vs Sabri Enterprises (2008) 298 ITR 141 (Kar), Consultants India P Ltd Vs CIT Bangalore III (2013) 597/34 Taxman.com 20 (Kar). With regard to inconsistency in total disallowance u/s 37, the sum of Rs.17,193/- incurred as Club Expenses is for the purposes of Customers and the same is allowable on the basis of decision of Supreme Court in United Glass Manufacturing Company. 4. However t…

Bevel Gears (India) Private Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 376/BANG/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Oct 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Sri.Gururaj Acharya, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Ganesh R.Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 139(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…ation the following case laws which are passed by the jurisdictional High Court of Karnataka where the assessee is assessed. a. Essae Teroaka Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT, Karnataka High Court ITA No.480/2013 dated 4th February, 2014. b. CIT v. Sabari Enterprises (2008) 298 ITR 141 (Kar.) c. Spectrum Consultants India (P) Ltd. v. CIT (2013) 34 taxmann.com 20 (Kar.) The other case-laws where similar cases are assessed in favour of the assessee on similar issues are as under: 2 ITA No.376/Bang/2021. M/s.Bevel Gears (India) Pvt.Ltd. d. CIT v. Aimil Ltd. (2010) 321 ITR 508 (Del) e. CIT v. Kichha Sugar Company Ltd. (ITA No.50 o…

M/S. Jana Urban Services for Transformation Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 307/BANG/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Oct 2021AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George Kassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Siddesh S Gaddi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri I.C Prabhakar, JCIT(DR)
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(9)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 2Section 36(1)(va)Section 6

…by us is answered in favour of the appellant-assessee and against the respondent-revenue. There shall be no order as to costs. Page 10 of 16 8. Further, he relied on the judgment of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Sabari Enterprises [2008] 298 ITR 141 (Kar.) has held as under: “This clause is inserted by the Finance Act with effect from April 1, 1988. The Explanation to this clause is read very carefully. "Due date" has been explained stating that: means the date by which the assessee is required as an employer to credit contribution to the employees' account in the relevant fund under any Ac…

M/S Lifestyle International Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the results appeal filed by assessee for assessment year

ITA 2826/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt Beena Pillai

Section 143(2)

…d.AO. Aggrieved by the view taken by the Ld.CIT(A) revenues in appeal for us now. 14. The Ld.DR pleased reliance on orders passed by the Ld.AO. 14.1 The Ld.AR submitted that on the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of Sabri Enterprises and Ors. reported in 298 ITR 141 and Essea Teraoka(P.) Ltd reported in (2014) 43 taxman.com 33 has held that contributions made by assessee to provident fund and employees State insurance are allowable deductions to assessee even though it is not made in the stipulated period as contemplated under the provisions of section 36(1)(va) of the act, but the same Page 30 of 37 IT(TP)…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Lifestyle International Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

In the results appeal filed by assessee for assessment year

ITA 2473/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Oct 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt Beena Pillai

Section 143(2)

…d.AO. Aggrieved by the view taken by the Ld.CIT(A) revenues in appeal for us now. 14. The Ld.DR pleased reliance on orders passed by the Ld.AO. 14.1 The Ld.AR submitted that on the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of Sabri Enterprises and Ors. reported in 298 ITR 141 and Essea Teraoka(P.) Ltd reported in (2014) 43 taxman.com 33 has held that contributions made by assessee to provident fund and employees State insurance are allowable deductions to assessee even though it is not made in the stipulated period as contemplated under the provisions of section 36(1)(va) of the act, but the same Page 30 of 37 IT(TP)…

M/S.Lifestyle International Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore

In the results appeal filed by assessee for assessment year

ITA 2334/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt Beena Pillai

Section 143(2)

…d.AO. Aggrieved by the view taken by the Ld.CIT(A) revenues in appeal for us now. 14. The Ld.DR pleased reliance on orders passed by the Ld.AO. 14.1 The Ld.AR submitted that on the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of Sabri Enterprises and Ors. reported in 298 ITR 141 and Essea Teraoka(P.) Ltd reported in (2014) 43 taxman.com 33 has held that contributions made by assessee to provident fund and employees State insurance are allowable deductions to assessee even though it is not made in the stipulated period as contemplated under the provisions of section 36(1)(va) of the act, but the same Page 30 of 37 IT(TP)…

M/S.Lifestyle International Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore

In the results appeal filed by assessee for assessment year

ITA 2333/BANG/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Oct 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt Beena Pillai

Section 143(2)

…d.AO. Aggrieved by the view taken by the Ld.CIT(A) revenues in appeal for us now. 14. The Ld.DR pleased reliance on orders passed by the Ld.AO. 14.1 The Ld.AR submitted that on the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of Sabri Enterprises and Ors. reported in 298 ITR 141 and Essea Teraoka(P.) Ltd reported in (2014) 43 taxman.com 33 has held that contributions made by assessee to provident fund and employees State insurance are allowable deductions to assessee even though it is not made in the stipulated period as contemplated under the provisions of section 36(1)(va) of the act, but the same Page 30 of 37 IT(TP)…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bangalore vs. M/S. Lifestyle International (P) Ltd., Bangalore

In the results appeal filed by assessee for assessment year

ITA 2260/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Oct 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt Beena Pillai

Section 143(2)

…d.AO. Aggrieved by the view taken by the Ld.CIT(A) revenues in appeal for us now. 14. The Ld.DR pleased reliance on orders passed by the Ld.AO. 14.1 The Ld.AR submitted that on the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in case of Sabri Enterprises and Ors. reported in 298 ITR 141 and Essea Teraoka(P.) Ltd reported in (2014) 43 taxman.com 33 has held that contributions made by assessee to provident fund and employees State insurance are allowable deductions to assessee even though it is not made in the stipulated period as contemplated under the provisions of section 36(1)(va) of the act, but the same Page 30 of 37 IT(TP)…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S Ksheer Sagar Developers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, all these five appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1162/JPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Aug 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita Nos. 1158 To 1162/Jp/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2015-16 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Ksheer Sagar Developers Vs. Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-2, Hotel Royal Orchid, Opp.- Bsnl Jaipur. Office, Near Durgapura Flyover, Tonk Road, Jaipur-302018. Pan No.: Aacck 3154 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Rajendra Singh (Cit-Dr) Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri S.R. Sharma, (Ca) & Shri Rajnikant Bhatra (Ca) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 06/07/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 31/08/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Two Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-4, Jaipur All Dated 31/07/2019 For The A.Y. 2011- 12 To 2015-16 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Singh (CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 35ASection 43BSection 69C

…aria Agglomerates P. Ltd. Jaipur ITA No. 10/2018, 11/2018 and 12/2018 dated 20.03.2019 wherein due to typographical error, it was considered in favour of the revenue. There are various other High Court decisions on the issue. CIT Vs. Sabri Enterprises (2008) 298 ITR 141 (Kar) etc. and recent judgement of Patna 40 ITA 1158 to 1162/JP/2019_ DCIT Vs M/s Ksheer Sagar Developers P Ltd. High Court in Bihar State Warehousing Corporation Ltd. Vs CIT (2017) 393 ITR 386.” 34. We have considered the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. From perusal of the impugned order, we…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S Ksheer Sagar Developers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, all these five appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1161/JPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita Nos. 1158 To 1162/Jp/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2015-16 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Ksheer Sagar Developers Vs. Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-2, Hotel Royal Orchid, Opp.- Bsnl Jaipur. Office, Near Durgapura Flyover, Tonk Road, Jaipur-302018. Pan No.: Aacck 3154 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Rajendra Singh (Cit-Dr) Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri S.R. Sharma, (Ca) & Shri Rajnikant Bhatra (Ca) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 06/07/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 31/08/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Two Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-4, Jaipur All Dated 31/07/2019 For The A.Y. 2011- 12 To 2015-16 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Singh (CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 35ASection 43BSection 69C

…aria Agglomerates P. Ltd. Jaipur ITA No. 10/2018, 11/2018 and 12/2018 dated 20.03.2019 wherein due to typographical error, it was considered in favour of the revenue. There are various other High Court decisions on the issue. CIT Vs. Sabri Enterprises (2008) 298 ITR 141 (Kar) etc. and recent judgement of Patna 40 ITA 1158 to 1162/JP/2019_ DCIT Vs M/s Ksheer Sagar Developers P Ltd. High Court in Bihar State Warehousing Corporation Ltd. Vs CIT (2017) 393 ITR 386.” 34. We have considered the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. From perusal of the impugned order, we…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S Ksheer Sagar Developers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, all these five appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1160/JPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita Nos. 1158 To 1162/Jp/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2015-16 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Ksheer Sagar Developers Vs. Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-2, Hotel Royal Orchid, Opp.- Bsnl Jaipur. Office, Near Durgapura Flyover, Tonk Road, Jaipur-302018. Pan No.: Aacck 3154 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Rajendra Singh (Cit-Dr) Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri S.R. Sharma, (Ca) & Shri Rajnikant Bhatra (Ca) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 06/07/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 31/08/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Two Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-4, Jaipur All Dated 31/07/2019 For The A.Y. 2011- 12 To 2015-16 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Singh (CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 35ASection 43BSection 69C

…aria Agglomerates P. Ltd. Jaipur ITA No. 10/2018, 11/2018 and 12/2018 dated 20.03.2019 wherein due to typographical error, it was considered in favour of the revenue. There are various other High Court decisions on the issue. CIT Vs. Sabri Enterprises (2008) 298 ITR 141 (Kar) etc. and recent judgement of Patna 40 ITA 1158 to 1162/JP/2019_ DCIT Vs M/s Ksheer Sagar Developers P Ltd. High Court in Bihar State Warehousing Corporation Ltd. Vs CIT (2017) 393 ITR 386.” 34. We have considered the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. From perusal of the impugned order, we…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S Ksheer Sagar Developers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, all these five appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1159/JPR/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Aug 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita Nos. 1158 To 1162/Jp/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2015-16 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Ksheer Sagar Developers Vs. Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-2, Hotel Royal Orchid, Opp.- Bsnl Jaipur. Office, Near Durgapura Flyover, Tonk Road, Jaipur-302018. Pan No.: Aacck 3154 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Rajendra Singh (Cit-Dr) Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri S.R. Sharma, (Ca) & Shri Rajnikant Bhatra (Ca) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 06/07/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 31/08/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Two Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-4, Jaipur All Dated 31/07/2019 For The A.Y. 2011- 12 To 2015-16 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Singh (CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 35ASection 43BSection 69C

…aria Agglomerates P. Ltd. Jaipur ITA No. 10/2018, 11/2018 and 12/2018 dated 20.03.2019 wherein due to typographical error, it was considered in favour of the revenue. There are various other High Court decisions on the issue. CIT Vs. Sabri Enterprises (2008) 298 ITR 141 (Kar) etc. and recent judgement of Patna 40 ITA 1158 to 1162/JP/2019_ DCIT Vs M/s Ksheer Sagar Developers P Ltd. High Court in Bihar State Warehousing Corporation Ltd. Vs CIT (2017) 393 ITR 386.” 34. We have considered the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. From perusal of the impugned order, we…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Jaipur vs. M/S Ksheer Sagar Developers Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, all these five appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1158/JPR/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Aug 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm & Shri Vikram Singh Yadav, Am Vk;Dj Vihy La-@Ita Nos. 1158 To 1162/Jp/2019 Assessment Years: 2011-12 To 2015-16 Deputy Commissioner Of Cuke M/S Ksheer Sagar Developers Vs. Income Tax, Pvt. Ltd., Central Circle-2, Hotel Royal Orchid, Opp.- Bsnl Jaipur. Office, Near Durgapura Flyover, Tonk Road, Jaipur-302018. Pan No.: Aacck 3154 G Vihykfkhz@Appellant Izr;Fkhz@Respondent Jktlo Dh Vksj Ls@ Revenue By : Shri Rajendra Singh (Cit-Dr) Fu/Kzkfjrh Dh Vksj Ls@ Assessee By: Shri S.R. Sharma, (Ca) & Shri Rajnikant Bhatra (Ca) Lquokbz Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Hearing : 06/07/2021 Mn?Kks"K.Kk Dh Rkjh[K@ Date Of Pronouncement : 31/08/2021 Vkns'K@ Order Per: Sandeep Gosain, J.M. These Are The Appeals Filed By The Revenue Against The Two Separate Orders Of The Ld. Cit(A)-4, Jaipur All Dated 31/07/2019 For The A.Y. 2011- 12 To 2015-16 Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma, (CA) &For Respondent: Shri Rajendra Singh (CIT-DR) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 132Section 139Section 153ASection 35ASection 43BSection 69C

…aria Agglomerates P. Ltd. Jaipur ITA No. 10/2018, 11/2018 and 12/2018 dated 20.03.2019 wherein due to typographical error, it was considered in favour of the revenue. There are various other High Court decisions on the issue. CIT Vs. Sabri Enterprises (2008) 298 ITR 141 (Kar) etc. and recent judgement of Patna 40 ITA 1158 to 1162/JP/2019_ DCIT Vs M/s Ksheer Sagar Developers P Ltd. High Court in Bihar State Warehousing Corporation Ltd. Vs CIT (2017) 393 ITR 386.” 34. We have considered the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the material available on record. From perusal of the impugned order, we…

The Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S. Adecco India Pvt. Ltd

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue fails and

ITA/1053/2017HC Karnataka29 Jun 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,HEMANT CHANDANGOUDAR

Section 2(24)(x)Section 260Section 260A

…ee submitted that the substantial question of law involved in this appeal has already been answered in favour of the assessee by this Court vide judgments dated 4.02.2014 in the case of COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Vs. SABARI ENTERPRISES reported in [2008] 298 ITR 141 (KARNATAKA) and in the case of ESSAE TERAOKA (P.) LTD. Vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER 4 OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-11(3) reported in [2014] 43 TAXMANN.COM 33 (KARNATAKA) . 5. The aforesaid submission has not been disputed by the learned counsel for the revenue. 6. In view of submission and the for the reasons assigned in the aforesaid judgmen…

The Pr Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S Duster Total Solutions

ITA/297/2018HC Karnataka08 Jun 2021

Bench: SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA,R. NATARAJ

Section 14ASection 260

…e respondent – assessee. 4. It is not in dispute that the question of law framed by this Court in this appeal has already been considered by Division Bench of this Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax and another vs. Sabari Enterprises [(2008) 298 ITR 141]. 5. We have perused the judgment rendered in the aforesaid case and we find that the reasons set out therein to disallow the contention of the revenue are just and proper and do not call for any reconsideration. 6. In that view of the matter, the substantial question of law is answered against the revenue and in favour of t…

M/S Philips India Ltd vs. The State of Karnataka

STRP/297/2018HC Karnataka09 Apr 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,M.G.S. KAMAL

Section 14ASection 260

…e respondent – assessee. 4. It is not in dispute that the question of law framed by this Court in this appeal has already been considered by Division Bench of this Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax and another vs. Sabari Enterprises [(2008) 298 ITR 141]. 5. We have perused the judgment rendered in the aforesaid case and we find that the reasons set out therein to disallow the contention of the revenue are just and proper and do not call for any reconsideration. 6. In that view of the matter, the substantial question of law is answered against the revenue and in favour of t…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S. State Bank of Mysore

In the result, the order passed by the tribunal

ITA/355/2013HC Karnataka15 Oct 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 260Section 260ASection 263Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 41(1)

…counsel for the assessee further submitted that the 2nd substantial question of law as well as 6th substantial question of law are answered against the revenue by a Bench of this Court in ‘COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Vs. SABARI ENTERPRISES’ (2008) 298 ITR 141 (KAR) and 'COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX VS. KARNATAKA BANK LTD.', (2014) 49 TAXMANN.COM 246 (KARNATAKA). The aforesaid legal position could not be disputed by the learned counsel for the revenue. For the reasons assigned by a Bench of this Court in SABARI ENTERPRISES and KARNATAKA BANK LTD., supra, the 2nd as well as 6th substantial q…

The Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S. State Bank of Mysore

In the result, we do not find any merit in this

ITA/356/2013HC Karnataka15 Oct 2020

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD

Section 2(24)(x)Section 260Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 41(1)

…are kept open for the time being. 5. Learned counsel for the assessee further submitted that the 2nd substantial question of law has been answered against the revenue by a Bench of this Court in ‘COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Vs. SABARI ENTERPRISES’ (2008) 298 ITR 141 (KAR). The aforesaid legal position could not be disputed by the learned counsel for the revenue. 6. For the reasons assigned by a Bench of this Court in SABARI ENTERPRISES, supra, the 2nd substantial question of law is answered against the revenue. 5 In the result, we do not find any merit in this appeal. The same fails and is hereby d…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Coffee Day Global Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, both appeals of the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 816/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Sept 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Shree C. Ramesh, C. AFor Respondent: Shree T Roumuan Paite, CIT DR
Section 36

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI A. K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No. 815 & 816/Bang/2017 Assessment years : 2011 – 12 & 2012 – 13 DCIT Circle – 2 (1) (1), M/s Coffee Day Global Limited, Bengaluru No. 32/2, Coffee Day Square, Vs. Vittal Malya Road, Opp. U B City Building, Bengaluru – 560001 PAN : AABCA5291P APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shree C. Ramesh, C. A. Revenue by : Shree T Roumuan Paite, CIT DR Date of hearing : 02.09.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 30.09.2020 O R D E R PER ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, A. M.: Both these appeal…